Running News Daily

Your physiology is beautifully unique. I sound like John Mayer if he was a physical therapist. Our bodies are wonderlands, even if our glutes are unmaintained landfills.

The individual uniqueness of athletes creates a problem, though. How can we understand our physiology in the broader context of training theory when every variable is a bell curve across the population? General equations work if you're smack-dab in the middle of the bell curve thiccness, but can be actively wrong and counterproductive as you venture into the standard deviation hinterlands.

Consider the equation that many of you might have heard about heart rate: 180 beats per minute minus age = approximately aerobic threshold, or the intensity level that serves as a top-end barrier for easy/steady running that should encompass around 80% of your training volume. While that equation is generally useful, it can be actively useless for individuals, especially aging athletes who are highly trained and have a much higher aerobic threshold than the equation would predict.

For me, the equation caps my easy runs at 145 heart rate. My actual aerobic threshold is 152 beats per minute in running (and 150 beats per minute in biking). In practice, that's almost a one-minute-per-mile difference in output. Training from a general equation would prevent me from accruing benefits from steadier paces, and I'd probably be slower at everything.

raining zones from your watch can also be atrocious. In the last few months, I have helped a few hundred listeners of our podcast calculate their heart rate zones (our episode on heart rate zones is here). And a lesson I learned is that some of the watch brands use algorithms that are less accurate than U2 in Spanish class. Zone Uno, Zone Dos, Zone Tres, Zone Catorce, Zone Biblioteca, etc. Some of the watch zones are set so low that I have no idea what they could possibly be measuring. 

So today, let's look at one simple way to calculate your heart rate zones to help you calibrate your training intensity. Knowing your intensity ranges is helpful because it optimizes your metabolic fitness, allowing the body to burn more fat at higher outputs, while supporting mitochondrial proliferation and efficiency, allowing both higher and lower intensities to take less energy. Disclaimer: exercise physiology terminology is always subject to evolving debate, particularly on Twitter (the world's town square, if the square was also where the town put the raw sewage). Here is my favorite infographic ever on the overlap of these principles, from Fluid Athletics (follow them on Instagram here). 

What Are Heart Rate Zones?

We'll be using the traditional Five-Zone model, contrasted with the Three-Zone model used in most training research, but it helps to understand both and how they interact. Heart rate is best thought of as a proxy for lactate concentrations. To simplify it a ton, lactate is produced as our bodies use glucose to fuel ATP production during glycolysis. Lactate is a fuel source for cells, and it's accompanied by a hydrogen ion that changes muscle pH and contributes to fatigue. A 2018 review in Cell Metabolism described the lactate shuttle where the cells use lactate for energy. If this shuttling mechanism is overstressed, lactate levels and fatigue rise and exercise becomes less sustainable. A great overview by Dr. Howard Luks is here.

When lactate concentrations begin to rise, intensity switches from easy to moderate, an inflection point known as LT1, broadly overlapping with aerobic threshold where athletes go from primarily burning fat to primarily burning glycogen. And when lactate levels rise more steeply at higher intensities, intensity transitions from moderate to hard, an inflection point known as LT2, broadly overlapping with traditional lactate threshold (or critical velocity, depending on the method of calculation). That encompasses the 3-Zone model used in research:

Those zones are used in research to determine intensity distribution. While these breakdowns are gross approximations, it can help to put some numbers on paper to get your bearings (all of these numbers have big error bars). 

So if we're using heart rate to approximate lactate and the associated physiological impacts of fatigue, why don't we just use lactate? Good question, you article-ruining jerk. In a perfect world, athletes may decide to prick themselves for blood lactate readings with every interval like they're Norwegian vampires. Practically, though, there's a lactate learning curve in the best of times that can lead to inaccurate data, and in the worst of times it can take some of the spontaneous artistry out of daily training. You can probably tell I'm scared of blood, needles, and vampires (whether traditional or sexy). 

But have blood-free hope! Using the method in the article, I have approximated zones for professional athletes that have later been validated in lab tests with small enough margins of error to be useful. However, it's key to get a full lab test for truly accurate data. Heart rate without lactate, metabolic, and/or ventilatory lab tests is like determining the time from where the sun is in the sky. With context clues, you can be close, but you wouldn't want to use it to cook a turkey.

Five-Zone Training Model

Now, let's finally get to the Five-Zone heart rate model that is used in most training approaches. The Three-Zone model is overlaid with green, yellow, and red (again, there is debate around the exact breakdown, particularly with the Zone three/Zone four delineation).

There are a few ways to set the zones, but I see the most repeatability and accuracy with the Lactate Threshold Heart Rate method pioneered by legendary coach Joe Friel. As outlined in Training Peaks, he suggests that athletes "do a 30-minute time trial all by yourself (no training partners and not in a race). Again, it should be done as if it was a race for the entire 30 minutes. But at 10 minutes into the test, click the lap button on your heart rate monitor. When done, look to see what your average heart rate was for the last 20 minutes." 

I like athletes to do the test on uphills, where they won't be limited by neuromuscular and biomechanical factors if they don't have a ton of speed training. If it wasn't a truly hard effort or your heart rate takes a lot of time to increase across an effort, you can take the average heart rate from a section as short as 10 minutes. Because this isn't an exact measurement like in a lab test, think of it as an art that is useful in understanding your body, rather than attempting to find a correct answer like high school algebra.

For an easy way to scrub complex data files with HR variation, you can use the Strava Sauce browser plug-in, highlight the area you want to examine, and it will give averages without ever lapping the watch. When I calculate zones for athletes, I have found that you can also approximate LTHR from almost any hard workout with intervals 3 minutes or over by looking for spots in the file where heart rate stabilizes for 15-30 seconds before rising to less sustainable levels (and sometimes falling back toward that baseline in longer efforts). Be careful about using data from very hot days or long races over 90 minutes, when heart rate can sometimes be sustained above Friel's LTHR in ways that are not mirrored by the underlying physiology. 

A big key here: the data needs to be accurate. Chest-straps are ideal for these purposes, and if you are doing a workout to set heart rate zones, it's worth using the chest strap even if it feels like you're getting the heimlich maneuver from a weak octopus. While wrist-straps are rapidly improving in accuracy, there is extreme variation among athletes/watch brands. For example, my Garmin 745 seems to work really well in most circumstances (see this beautiful graph of a threshold workout). But other athletes don't have that success, and sometimes they send me heart rate files that look like Bitcoin price graphs (we are not sure why it's going up and down, but we can be pretty sure it's nefarious). 

How to Set Your Heart Rate Zones

Once you have the LTHR number, it's time to set those elusive zones. We're at another controversial point where the exact percentages are subject to extreme debate. The problem: when you validate heart rate data with lab tests, individual physiology varies substantially. LTHR narrows down that physiological variation to get an idea of zones, but the exact delineation depends on training history, muscle fiber typology, metabolic context, astrological sign, etc. Don't even get me started on Scorpios.

Here are the percentages that Megan and I like to use:

Let's dig into an example from my data. In February, I did a virtual bike race up a mountain. Using the Strava Sauce plug-in and highlighting the final 20 minutes of that hard effort, my LTHR was 172. While there is variance across sports and my heart rate is higher with running, that means my current zones for biking are approximately:

Your LTHR may increase with training and it will drop with age. Athletes are often between 165 and 175, though in professional athletes, I have seen numbers as high as 189 and as low as 152. You can see why dialing in your unique physiology is so important. An athlete with an LTHR of 160 needs to cap most of their easy runs at 140 heart rate (top end of Zone 2). Meanwhile, an athlete with an LTHR of 180 can go all the way up to 157! Often, everything about those athletes can look the same from the outside-same age, same PRs, same training, same potential. But they have very different hearts.

How To Use Your Heart Rate Zones

There are two places where having a general feel for your personal heart rate zones can be most helpful: understanding your Zone 2 (with LT1 as a cap) and determining the sustainability of longer efforts. First, let's break down how to think about each of the zones:

Knowing that Zone two cutoff can help calibrate an athlete's effort so they understand what terms like "easy," "steady," and "moderate" actually mean. Spot-checking heart rate periodically on harder efforts can ensure that athletes aren't going too hard, pushing everything into Zone five and reducing aerobic adaptations. I love athletes to get a feel for how high their heart rate gets on uphills especially, since excessive effort on ups can lead to reduced endurance and race performance. Zone 3 is your friend, in moderation. Zone four is your acquaintance. And spending too much time with Zone five will end with you folded up in a car trunk somewhere outside Las Vegas.

Takeaway

The big takeaway is that heart rate is just a proxy for fatigue processes, especially when calculated outside of a lab. The numbers can vary by the day, and they change across training blocks. Temperature, stress, caffeine, and political news all impact the numbers enough that caring too much about a few beats per minute is unhelpful. The day I first heard the nickname "Meatball Ron," I was in Zone three while sitting on the couch.

Instead, view heart rate as a way to calibrate your physiology in a general way, spot-checking your perceived exertion so that you know what you think your body is doing generally aligns with what your body is actually doing. Once an athlete dials in heart rate, I like them to look at it once every couple weeks during a run, and solely after-the-fact on other runs (if at all), never investing too much in small changes. Heart rate sometimes takes a while to respond, so I find it's rarely useful on shorter intervals.

If you train within the correct general range of intensities, whether guided by heart rate, lactate, and/or perceived exertion, you can improve output at Zone two and Zone three heart rates in particular, and because those efforts are more sustainable metabolically, you'll excel in races. You definitely don't need to have a heart rate monitor to achieve those goals. But you do need to have a good feel for your unique physiology. 

All of our bodies can be well-calibrated wonderlands. We sometimes just need a little bit of the sexiest thing of all: data.

The prospect of seeing one of athletics' biggest stars back on the track is growing stronger, with Jakob Ingebrigtsen reportedly targeting a return to competition later this summer following his recovery from Achilles tendon surgery.

According to comments made by his agent, Daniel Wessfeldt, in an interview with Norwegian media, the double Olympic champion could make his long-awaited comeback at one of three major European meetings in July. The leading options under consideration are the Monaco Diamond League on July 10, the Hungarian Athletics Grand Prix on July 14, and the London Diamond League on July 18.

For athletics fans, the possibility of Ingebrigtsen lining up in London would add another layer of excitement to an already highly anticipated Diamond League meeting. The Norwegian middle-distance sensation has become one of the sport's most dominant figures in recent years, collecting Olympic, world and European titles while consistently rewriting record books.

His 2026 campaign was put on hold after he underwent surgery on his Achilles tendon earlier this year, forcing him to focus on rehabilitation rather than competition. Since then, questions have surrounded when the 24-year-old would be ready to return to racing.

The latest update suggests that decision will largely depend on how his training progresses over the coming weeks. If recovery continues according to plan, July could mark the beginning of his return to elite competition ahead of the latter stages of the season.

A comeback at either Monaco, Budapest or London would immediately place Ingebrigtsen back among the sport's biggest storylines. Each meeting is renowned for producing world-class performances, and any appearance by the Norwegian would attract significant attention from fans eager to see how quickly he can regain top form after his injury setback.

While no final decision has been confirmed, the signs are increasingly positive. After months away from competition, Jakob Ingebrigtsen appears to be edging closer to a return, with London's Diamond League meeting emerging as one of the most intriguing possibilities on his road back to the track.

Should his recovery continue smoothly, athletics could soon welcome back one of its brightest and most influential stars.

What should have been the defining moment of Emad Bashir-Mohammed's young running career instead turned into one of the most talked-about controversies in American road racing this year.

The 23-year-old crossed the finish line first in the men's citizen's race at the prestigious Bolder Boulder 10K on Memorial Day in Colorado, stopping the clock at an impressive 29:50. His performance was not only a commanding victory but also one of the fastest winning times ever recorded in the event's long and celebrated history. Bashir-Mohammed finished eight seconds clear of his nearest challenger and appeared to have secured a breakthrough triumph.

For nearly two hours, he was the undisputed winner.

Then everything changed.

Race officials announced that Bashir-Mohammed had been disqualified after determining that he had started in the wrong wave. According to Bolder Boulder regulations, he had been assigned to the AA wave but lined up with the faster A wave, which began earlier. Event rules allow runners to move backward into a slower wave, but prohibit athletes from advancing into a faster one.

As a result, Bashir-Mohammed's victory was erased from the record books.

The citizen's title was subsequently awarded to Nickolas Scudder, who crossed the line second in 29:58. The promotion handed Scudder back-to-back citizen's race victories, while Bashir-Mohammed was left to grapple with the disappointment of losing a win he believed he had earned on the road.

The disqualification has since ignited widespread debate across the running community.

Bashir-Mohammed maintains that he did not intentionally violate the rules. He claims that after collecting his AA bib, he spoke with race personnel and was permitted to start with the A wave after presenting evidence of his recent performances. In a statement shared after the race, he expressed frustration over the decision, arguing that his goal was simply to compete against the strongest field available and produce the fastest time possible.

Race organizers, however, stood firmly behind their ruling. Officials stated that wave-assignment regulations are clearly communicated in pre-race information and reiterated during packet collection. They also noted that hundreds of participants are disqualified each year for moving into faster start groups, emphasizing that consistent enforcement is necessary to maintain fairness for all competitors.

The incident has divided opinion among runners and fans alike. Some believe the rules must be applied equally regardless of an athlete's finishing position, arguing that wave assignments are a fundamental part of race organization. Others feel the punishment is harsh, particularly if Bashir-Mohammed genuinely received approval to move up before the start.

What remains undisputed is the quality of his performance. On the roads of Boulder, Bashir-Mohammed demonstrated the fitness and speed required to outrun the field by a significant margin. Yet in road racing, crossing the finish line first is only part of the equation. Compliance with race regulations carries equal weight.

For Bashir-Mohammed, the day will be remembered as a painful lesson in the fine margins that can define elite competition. A remarkable run delivered a memorable victory, but a dispute over wave placement ultimately overshadowed the achievement, leaving behind a controversy that continues to fuel discussion throughout the running world.

A fast race, a costly administrative error, and a debate that may linger long after the finish-line tape has been packed away.

The men's 100 metres at the 2026 Rome Diamond League is shaping up to be one of the most anticipated sprint races of the season, with an exceptional field featuring some of the fastest men in the world.

Scheduled for Thursday, June 4, at the iconic Stadio Olimpico in Rome, the race will bring together reigning stars, established champions and emerging talents in a contest that promises fireworks from the moment the gun goes off.

Kenya's Ferdinand Omanyala headlines a world-class lineup that includes American sprint sensation Noah Lyles, Botswana's Olympic champion Letsile Tebogo, Jamaica's explosive Ackeem Blake, South Africa's ever-consistent Akani Simbine and Italy's hometown hero Lamont Marcell Jacobs. With personal bests ranging from 9.77 to 9.97 seconds, the field is packed with athletes capable of producing something special on the Diamond League stage.

Omanyala, the African record holder with a blistering personal best of 9.77 seconds, arrives in Rome eager to continue his strong early-season form and prove he can challenge the very best on the global circuit. The Kenyan star has built a reputation as one of the fastest starters in world sprinting and will be looking to make a statement against an elite field.

Standing in his way is world champion Noah Lyles, whose personal best of 9.79 seconds places him among the fastest athletes in history. The American remains one of the sport's biggest attractions and will be determined to add another Diamond League victory to his impressive résumé.

The race also marks a major test for Olympic champion Letsile Tebogo. The Botswanan star has rapidly become one of athletics' most exciting talents, while Ackeem Blake continues to establish himself as a serious contender on the international sprint scene.

Adding further intrigue is the presence of Italy's Lamont Marcell Jacobs. Competing on home soil, the Tokyo Olympic champion will enjoy passionate local support as he seeks to deliver a memorable performance in front of the Roman crowd.

South Africa's Akani Simbine, Cameroon's Emmanuel Eseme, Great Britain's Jeremiah Azu and rising American talent Jordan Anthony complete a field that boasts remarkable depth and quality.

Men's 100m Entry List – Rome Diamond League 2026

Ferdinand Omanyala (Kenya) – PB: 9.77

Noah Lyles (USA) – PB: 9.79

Lamont Marcell Jacobs (Italy) – PB: 9.80

Akani Simbine (South Africa) – PB: 9.82

Letsile Tebogo (Botswana) – PB: 9.86

Ackeem Blake (Jamaica) – PB: 9.88

Jordan Anthony (USA) – PB: 9.91

Emmanuel Eseme (Cameroon) – PB: 9.96

Jeremiah Azu (Great Britain) – PB: 9.97

With multiple national record holders, global champions and Olympic medal contenders sharing the same start line, the Rome Diamond League men's 100m could deliver one of the fastest races of the year. For sprint fans around the world, all eyes will be on Rome as a stellar cast battles for supremacy over athletics' blue-riband distance.

Audrey Werro announced her arrival as one of the early stars of the 2026 outdoor season with a commanding victory in the women’s 800 metres at the Rabat Diamond League, producing a performance that exceeded even her own expectations.

The Swiss middle-distance talent surged to victory in a brilliant 1:56.56, breaking the meeting record and delivering one of the fastest times recorded worldwide this season. In a race packed with quality, Werro displayed exceptional composure, confidence, and finishing strength to separate herself from the field and stamp her authority on the event.

What made the performance even more remarkable was the athlete's surprise at the level she had already reached so early in the campaign.

"I was not expecting such a strong start to the season," Werro admitted after the race.

The race unfolded at a relentless pace, but Werro remained perfectly positioned throughout. As the athletes approached the bell lap, she glanced at the clock and immediately sensed something special was within reach.

"When I saw the time at the bell, I felt really confident," she said. "I'm really happy with the Meeting Record and looking forward to the rest of the season."

Her confidence proved justified. Maintaining her rhythm over the final 400 metres, Werro powered down the home straight to secure the victory and rewrite the Rabat meeting record books in the process.

The performance sends an early warning to her rivals ahead of a season that promises major championships and high-profile Diamond League battles. Beyond the record-breaking time, Werro's display highlighted her growing maturity as a racer, combining tactical awareness with impressive speed and endurance.

With the outdoor season only beginning, the 1:56.56 clocking suggests that even faster times could be on the horizon. If Rabat is any indication, Audrey Werro may be poised for the biggest season of her career.

Her emphatic victory in Morocco was more than just another Diamond League win—it was a statement of intent from an athlete determined to challenge the world's best throughout 2026.

The city of Boston is set to welcome back one of its most celebrated champions as Kenya’s Sharon Lokedi headlines a world-class field for the 2026 B.A.A. 10K presented by Mass General Brigham Cancer Institute on June 21.

Fresh from another remarkable victory at the Boston Marathon in April, Lokedi returns to the streets of Boston and Cambridge carrying both momentum and confidence as she aims to defend the title she captured in dominant fashion last year.

The two-time Boston Marathon champion has developed a special connection with the historic race city. In 2025, she produced a course-record performance of 2:17:22 to win the Boston Marathon before returning this year to claim another victory in 2:18:51, the second-fastest winning time in the event’s storied history. Her success has cemented her status as one of the premier road runners in the world.

Lokedi will be making her first competitive appearance since her marathon triumph and arrives as the reigning B.A.A. 10K champion after clocking 31:39 over the challenging 6.2-mile course in 2025.

“Boston has become a very special place for me,” Lokedi said ahead of the race. “The atmosphere created by the fans and the community is unlike anywhere else. I’m excited to return and give everything I have to defend my title.”

The women’s race promises to be highly competitive. American Olympian Rachel Smith, who finished second at the Boston 5K in April, leads the domestic challenge. Kenya’s strong contingent includes African 10,000m champion Gladys Kwamboka, former B.A.A. 10K runner-up Stacy Ndiwa, and experienced road racer Viola Cheptoo. British Olympian Jessica Warner-Judd adds further international depth to a field packed with proven performers.

The men’s race is equally impressive, featuring elite athletes from 13 nations.

Ethiopia’s Dawit Seare enters as one of the leading contenders after capturing the 2025 Boston 5K title and bringing the fastest 10K personal best in the field at 27:21. Kenya will be represented by an accomplished group led by Alexander Mutiso, winner of the 2024 London Marathon and runner-up at last year’s New York City Marathon.

Patrick Kiprop also arrives in outstanding form after securing victory at the prestigious BolderBoulder 10K on Memorial Day, while Alex Masai returns looking to continue his strong record in Boston. Masai recently finished ninth at the Boston Marathon and has earned three top-ten finishes at the B.A.A. 10K.

Among the international stars making their mark is South Africa’s Adriaan Wildschutt, who makes his race debut after an impressive season highlighted by victory at the NYC Half Marathon in 59:30. Ethiopia’s Olympic bronze medallist Hagos Gebrhiwet adds further quality to the field, bringing a wealth of championship experience and previous success in Boston.

Canadian national 10K champion Andrew Alexander, two-time U.S. Olympian Hillary Bor, marathon standout Ryan Ford, and reigning USA 25K champion Andrew Colley complete a field stacked with talent and depth.

With defending champions, Olympic finalists, national champions and rising stars all converging on Boston, the 2026 B.A.A. 10K is shaping up to be one of the most competitive editions in recent memory. For Sharon Lokedi, however, the mission is simple: return to the city where she has repeatedly excelled and add another memorable chapter to her growing Boston legacy.